Terms and Conditions

Please note that our Terms of Service,
and Privacy Policy
(collectively, the "Terms") have been updated. Please read and accept
our new Terms. Your acceptance of our new Terms is required in order
to fully participate on our websites.

When I read this whole debate, people talked as if only the attack side is impacted by the change, and the defense can still chain deny. The change applies to both sides of the battle.

The very first turn of any battle is unchanged. The fastest denier still go first in the start of the second turn, but unlikely to deny for a second turn. The slower denier will have chance for a deny to the other side, which just drag out the battle for one extra turn.

After both sides get denied once, the faster denier would start deny again, since the recently controlled status just expired.

So the big winner is DOT user since the fight is long enough for the damage to fully kick in. The big loser is those monster that need a two-turn setup, with weakness to ... skill, since the next turn will result in being denied and cannot utilize the weakness to ... trait.

But is that not the real issue here? It is a zero-sum game. Every war has a winner and loser. If someone win 60% of the time, someone will loss 60% of the time.

And you know what happens to the teams that loss 60% of its war? The members leave, and the team just disappears. So the weak team that win 40% of the time will not stay around, so the team that left standing are ones that used to win 60%, but there is no weak teams left to win against.

Regardless of what matching algorithm do, the total number of wins and losses in the system has to equal. So you will always be disappointed if you expect above 50% win rate, unless there is some team that are 0-200 and keeps fighting, to keep generating wins for the other teams.

Usually, battles in team wars are very one sided. One team is just that much stronger than the other team. Team wars can be made more exciting and unpredictable if the weaker team can use some kind of boost.
Let us say if a player makes an attack, and gets 0 coins, it usually means he is weaker against the opponent. He is given a boost token so he can be stronger in the next battle.
If he uses this boost token, it will randomly kill off one of the opponent's monsters, make it a 3 vs. 2 battle. That means, a player who usually has no chance against an opponent, can have some chance of one victory out of 2 total attacks.
To prevent abuse, we can put some limits to the number of boost tokens a player can carry, to say, 5. And the war needs to record the total boost token used on both sides, so unusual usage can be spotted.
That means a weaker team, may have a chance against a stronger team, if the weaker team use many more boost token in a war, as the stronger team may not have any boost token by winning previous wars.

I think the top players simply run out of possible targets, so the lower league players are being targeted.

The way it is now, every time someone PVPs, the total amount of trophies in the whole system decreases, as the defenders loss is always bigger than the winner gain. If the attackers win, he gains 20, and the defender lost 30. So a net 10 is lost from the system. If the attacker loss, he lost 40, the defender gain 30. So a total of 10 is lost from the system as well.

It is simple math, so eventually everyone will be at 0 trophies, unless someone can get negative trophies?

The top players may keep their amount high by always winning. But their target keep having lower trophies, thus keep dropping from L4 to Gold 1, to gold 2, to gold 3, etc. I would not be surprised if soon, even top 500 players can no longer have more than 4000, thus be dropped from L3 to Gold 1. There is simply no way to stabilize the system, and everyone will be at newbie league soon, maybe in season 11.